Emotional Intelligence in the Military Curriculum
Ms Lily Wisker
Command and Staff College, New Zealand
“Know the other and know yourself:
One hundred challenges without danger;
Know not the other and yet know yourself:
One triumph for one defeat;
Know not the other and know not yourself:
Every challenge is certain peril.”
Sun Tzu, Art of War
Introduction
The role of leadership in the defence forces is becoming increasingly imperative as
defence issues and challenges become more complex and multifaceted. Military
effectiveness relies on the ability of leaders to respond to ongoing pressure and to
manage others efficiently. To prepare for these challenges, we need to build up
curriculum that enables to develop military leaders than can adapt to new changes and
unexpected circumstances. In recent years there have been considerable growing
interests expressed about the scientific viability of emotional intelligence, EI
(Goleman, 1995; 1998; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2004). This concept has flourished
as a result of claims suggesting that emotional intelligence is a reliable predictor for
leader effectiveness (Bar-On, 1997; Goleman, 1998).
This overarching purpose of this paper is to explore the emerging field of emotional
intelligence (EI), its dimensions, and the implication it has for military leader
development curriculum. Finally I attempt to provide some strategies to develop EI in
the curriculum.
Overview of Emotional Intelligence (EI)
The theory of emotional intelligence was initiated by Harvard psychologist, Howard
Gardner in 1983 (Chrusciel, 2006). He built his theory based on the social intelligence
concept developed by Thordike in 1920 (Davies, Stankov, & Roberts, 1998). The
1
theory was then expanded by Mayer and Salovey in the early 1990s. However, it did
not become popular until Goleman published his book in 1995. EI has been developed
from neuro-psychology and neuro-science, and focuses on the connections and
circuitry in the brain that regulates emotions and in particular focuses on the role of
brain connectivity between the amygdale and the neural-cortex (Roche, 2004).
There are three predominant approaches to EI that have been validated and used
widely by a number of scholars in recent years. These are (not in any particular order
of importance);
 EQ-i Bar-On (Emotional Quotient Inventory) by Bar-On (1997);
 ECi- 2 (Emotional Competence Inventory version 2) by Goleman (1995;1998);
 MSCEIT (Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test) by Mayer,
Salovey & Caruso (1990; 1997; 2002; 2004); and
The descriptions are summarised in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Summary and Comparison of Emotional Intelligence Measure Characteristics
EI Measures
Theoretical Model EI Dimensions and Scales
Study
Type
Mayer,
Salovey and
Caruso (2002)
Ability test
against expert
and consensus
opinion
Mayer-SaloveyCaruso
Emotional
Intelligence Test
(MSCEIT)
Salovey & Mayer
(1990; 1997)




Length
Perception, appraisal,
expression of emotion.
Emotional facilitation of
thinking
Understanding and
analysing emotional
information
Regulation and
management of emotion
141 items
Sala (2002)
Self-report
questionnaire
multirater
Emotional
Competence
Inventory,
Version 2
(ECI-2)
Goleman (1995;
1998)




Self-awareness
Self-management
Social awareness
Social skills
72 items
Bar-On (2004)
Self-report
questionnaire
Multirater
Emotional
Competence
Quotient (EQ-i)
Bar-On (1997)





Intrapersonal
Interpersonal
Adaptation
Stress management
General mood
133 items
Law, Wong, &
Self-report
WLEIS scale
Salovey & Mayer

Self emotion appraisal
16 items
2
Song (2002)
Goldenberg,
Matheson, &
Mantler (2006)
questionnaire
against peers’
opinion
Self- report
against
supervisor’s
opinion
Self-report
questionnaire
Mayer-SaloveyCaruso
Emotional
Intelligence Test
(MSCEIT)
(1990; 1997)
Davies et al.
(1998)

Salovey, Mayer &
Caruso (1997)






Others emotions
appraisal
Use of emotion
Regulation of emotion
33 items
selfassessment
Mood regulation
Appraisal of Emotion
Use of Emotion
Sharing/experiencing
Emotion
Psychologist Bar-On (1997) uses emotional quotient to illustrate emotional
intelligence as an array of non-cognitive skills. Further he describes emotional
intelligence as knowledge and a set of emotional and social capabilities that
influences one’s general ability to effectively face her/his environment’s demands
(Gabel, Dolan, & Cerdin, 2005). Based on 19 years of research and tested on over
48,000 individuals worldwide, the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory is designed
to measure a number of construct related to emotional intelligence. However the
measure has received robust criticism due to the nature of its testing. The measure is
allied with reality testing, independence, long lists of non cognitive skills and the
scales assess self-reports of something broader than EI (Bar On, 1997; 2000). As a
result the conceptualisations often have little or nothing specifically to do with
emotions and fail to map onto the term emotional intelligence ((Mayer et al., 2004).
Emotional intelligence from Goleman’s (1995; 1998) perspective is defined by
competencies that may be developed through learning (D. Goleman, Boyatzis, &
McKee, 2002). Emotional intelligence is claimed to increase with age and is linked
with maturity and as such it can be learnt and improved on over time to some extent
through practice and commitment (Goleman, 1995). The effective management of
emotions could contribute to the handling of the needs, satisfaction, and motivation of
a subordinate at work (Goleman, 1998). Goleman’s claims however, were rarely
supported by empirical findings. Consequently his concept of EI is the least adopted
by other studies (Semadar, Robins, & Ferris, 2006).
Mayer, Caruso and Salovey (2000) define EI as the ability to accurately perceive,
appraise and express emotion; the ability to assess and/or generate feelings when they
facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the
3
ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth. Emotional
intelligence involves the recognition, use, understanding and management of others’
emotional states and the ability to use those feelings to motivate and achieve (Salovey
& Mayer, 1990). The abilities can be measured by reading emotion in faces, or group
interactions through Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT)
measures (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). The MSCEIT test contains tasks that ask
respondents to identify emotions in photographs of faces and in images and
landscapes, compare different emotions to different sensations such as colours,
indicate how emotions influence thinking and reasoning, assemble emotions into
complex feelings, identify how emotions transition from one to another, and rate the
effectiveness of different emotion regulation strategies in both intrapersonal and
interpersonal contexts.
Emotional Intelligence and Leadership Performance
There have been several analytic studies that have shown a positive association
between emotional intelligence and managerial performance (Dulewicz, Young, &
Dulewicz, 2005; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002; Semadar et al., 2006)
A growing body of research claims that EI is a better predictor of success than the
traditional measures of general intelligence, IQ (D. Goleman, 1995, 1998; Pellitteri,
2002). The higher up a leader goes in an organisation, the more important emotional
intelligence becomes, compared to IQ and technical skills (Goleman, Boyatzis &
McKee, 2002). More recently, Dulewicz, Young, and Dulewicz’s (2005) study
provides some initial evidence that emotional intelligence makes the greatest
contributions to overall performance of leaders (9.2%) compared to general
intelligence (5.0%) and managerial competencies (6.1%). Emotional intelligence can
enhance job performance of leaders even with low cognitive skills through quality of
social relationships (Cote & Miners, 2006). For example, if job performance is not
attained through cognitive intelligence, it can be attained through emotional
intelligence via multiple complementary mechanisms such as interactions with
subordinates, co-workers, supervisors, and support staff (Cote & Miners, 2006).
4
A leader with high emotional intelligence may employ their abilities to develop good
social relationships that can boast task performance through advice and social support
(Pearce & Randel, 2004; Wong & Law, 2002). For instance, the ability to be
empathetic and understand both one’s own emotions and the emotions of others
would enable one to establish rapport with and effectively manage subordinates
(Semadar, Robins, & Ferris, 2006).
A leader who possesses the ability to manage his/her emotions may be likely to
exercise self-control in problem situations thus earning the respect and trust of
followers (Barling, Slater, & Kelloway, 2000). In addition, a leader that is able to
manage and control emotional states such as anger and frustration can be conducive to
a more stable working environment (Newsome, Day, & Catano, 2000). Interestingly
Isen, Daubman and Nowicki (1987) suggests that leaders who possess the ability to
control their moods and emotions or express positive moods may be likely to engage
in creative and innovative thinking and to encourage this type of thinking among their
followers (Isen, Daubman, & Nowicki, 1987).
Other researchers, Cote and Miners (2006) reveal that emotional intelligence is an
important predictor of job performance due to its interactive effect with cognitive
intelligence. Previous research has also explicitly proposed that emotional intelligence
relates to task performance in independent and complementary linear ways (Cote &
Miners, 2006).
Leaders who posses the ability to understand their followers needs and expectations
may have an advantage in terms of inspiring and motivating followers (Barling, et al.,
2000). In order for leaders to inspire, motivate and boast the morale of their followers,
they may utilise emotions to enhance cognitive processing of events or issues that
pose a threat to the organisation (George, 2000).
Emotional Intelligence and Military Leadership
Some military leaders are likely to dismiss the concept of EI as too “soft, civilian and
wimpy image” and therefore irrelevant to the military’s unique warfighting mission.
That would be a mistake (Abrahams, 2007). In the next paragraph I will analyse the
5
definition of leadership from the military perspective as defined in Field Manual 22100, Army Leadership, USA (1999) and relate it to an emotional intelligence
competence framework. The US Army leadership framework has defined seven
values, three attributes, four skills and three actions as the fundamental leadership
characteristics to prepare military leaders.
“Leadership is influencing people – by providing purpose, direction, and
motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improve the
organisation”.
(FM 22-100, 1999, p. 4-6)
Influencing is the central tenet to the Army’s definition of leadership and it is about
getting subordinates to do what a leader wants them to do as a result of an interactive
process between the two. The time for “do it my way or highway” has gone. Effective
military leaders that have developed interpersonal and social skills that would allow
them to increase their ability to communicate with subordinates, and eventually be
able to align subordinates’ goals and aspirations with the organisation’s missions. In
fact social skills would enable leaders to manage conflict, initiate and manage change,
and create group synergy in pursuing collective goals.
Next, I would like you to observe the incident below.
According to a commanding officer who served at Operation Desert Shield and Desert
Storm;
“As soon as we stepped off the plane at our final location, the major challenge
for me and the four other officers in our 100-man PRIME BEEF team was to
keep morale up. Initially we had limited tools and equipment, poor food,
grossly overcrowded living conditions, and a sense that we were just a burden
on the base. I found myself constantly explaining the big picture when I didn’t
know what it was. Nor did I know whether our situation would improve. I
never realised how much the enlisted force depended on us for information
and leadership. We spent a significant amount of time counselling and trying
to boast the morale of the soldiers up. I had not expected this task, and
6
frequently I found it difficult due to the complexity of the problem or just
plain lack of experience in counselling on my part.”
(as cited in Latour, Bradley, & Hosmer, 2002)
This incident clearly illustrates that operational deployments require military leaders
to possess the full spectrum of leadership skills. Military leaders must remain alert to
signs of stress within the people. The domain of EI, in this example, empathy can be
employed to manage emotions and boast morale of subordinates. If only he was
exposed to leadership development and building of EI abilities and skills, he would be
able to understand his subordinates by sensing the subordinates’ feeling and
perspectives and taking an active interest in their concerns. He would be able to
counsel and mentor through the stress of long periods away from home.
Success on operations often depends more on morale than on material advantages.
Numbers, armament and physical resources cannot compensate for lack of courage,
cohesion, energy, determination, endurance, skill and a warfighting ethos, that spring
from a national determination to succeed. The development and subsequent
maintenance of the qualities of morale are therefore essential to success in war
(NZDDP-D, 2004, p. 6-12).
Other research conducted in the military context by Livingstone, Nadjiwon-Foster and
Smithers (2002) for the Canadian Forces Leadership Institute reveals that there is a
conceptual link between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership
suggesting that the domains of EI may be important for the prediction of
transformational leadership behaviours.
The Myth of Emotional Intelligence
As there have been studies that have shown some positive associations between
emotional intelligence and work performance (e.g. Dulewicz, Young, & Dulewicz,
2005; Semadar, Robins, & Ferris, 2006) as discussed earlier and given the concept of
EI was popularised and widely made known through series of eccentric articles
7
(Gibbs, 1995) and trade books (Goleman, 1995;1998) it is not surprising that EI has
been accepted and well received among military curriculum developers worldwide
*(to name a few, New Zealand Forces, Canadian Forces, Australian Forces, US Air
Forces and Singaporean Forces).
However we need to be cautious when applying the concept of EI to the military
curriculum. In the following, I will discuss some of the pitfalls of EI.
Many researchers have expressed opinions about the scientific viability of emotional
intelligence. For example EI is branded as an elusive and a vague concept (Davies,
Stankov & Roberts, 1998, p. 898) and more myth than science (Matthews, Zeidner, &
Roberts, 2002).
The definitions of EI proposed in the literature are not conceptually coherent.
Conceptualisations of EI range from an ability for processing information that is
applied to emotion (Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 2000) to a complex interaction of
qualities of emotions, mood, personality, and social orientation applied in both
interpersonal and intrapersonal situations (Bar-On, 2000). Goleman (1995) on the
other hand conceptualises EI as all those positive skills that are not IQ.
So is EI a set of abilities, skills, competencies or complex interactions of personality
traits and emotions?
As a result this confusion would pose a threat for us as curriculum developers. Shall
we use the Goleman (1995) or Mayer, et al. (2000) or Bar-On (1997) concept of EI?
Whose measures shall we adopt then?
The literature is also not consistent in reporting the association of EI and leadership
effectiveness.
For example, Cherniss and Goleman (2001) suggests that emotional intelligence
provides the basis of competencies important for managers in almost any job(Cherniss
& Goleman, 2001). This claim however seems to be very extreme and needs further
8
empirical testing. It is acknowledged over the years that one aspect of the situation
influencing skill importance is a manager’s position in the authority hierarchy of
organisation (Yulk, 2002). As a result, it is difficulty to argue the effect of EI on job
outcomes will be the same across job categories (Wong & Law, 2002).
Another study suggests that, if job performance is not attained through cognitive
intelligence, it can be attained through emotional intelligence (Cote & Miners, 2006).
This finding contradicts Lam and Kirby (2002) that found “understanding emotions of
others did not contribute to individual cognitive based performance over and above
the level of attributable to general intelligence” (Lam & Kirby, 2002).
Lingstone, Nadjiwon-Foster and Smithers (2002) emphasis on the importance of
emotional intelligence in the leadership process is apparent but later admit that their
view has not been empirically examined in past research (Livingstone, NajjiwonFoster, & Smithers, 2002).
EI in Military Curriculum
Given both sides of arguments underpinning the concept EI in the literature, thorough
deliberations should be taken in adopting the concept into the curriculum. In the
following I attempt to provide some strategies in employing EI into the military
education and training curriculum.
EI Constructs
While the definitions of EI are often varied for different researchers, they nevertheless
tend to be complimentary rather than contradictory (Ciarrochi, Chan, & Caputi, 2000;
Law, Wong, & Song, 2004). The literature is consistent in reporting that EI has roots
in the concept of social intelligence that was first identified by Thorndike in 1920 and
EI comprises of combination of the intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence of
individual (Goleman, 1998; Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 2000; Lam, Wong & Song,
2004; Abraham, 2007). Researchers also agree that EI meets standards of traditional
intelligence (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2004). By that they mean that EI meets three
broad criteria. First EI test items can be operationalised in such a fashion that there are
9
more or less correct answers. Second EI shows specific patterns of correlation similar
to those of known intelligence and finally EI should develop with age (Goleman,
1995: Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2004). There is also ample empirical evidence to
show that EI is different from personality traits.
It is clear that the concept and domain of EI have been gradually accepted in
numerous studies (Davies et al., 1998; Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 1999; 2004; Law,
Wong & Song, 2004; Chrusciel, 2006). Given the confusion over the definition and
domain of EI constructs in the past, I believe that it would be beneficial to the
curriculum developers to adopt a mutually acceptable definition of the construct and
to develop more standardised measures according to this definition. Knowing one’s
emotions, managing emotions and recognising emotions in others are the basic
dimensions of EI constructs.
EI Does Not Work in Isolation
In their study, Lam and Kirby (2002) found that understanding emotions of others did
not contribute to individual cognitive based performance over and above the level
attributable to general intelligence. This is not a surprising finding because although
EI is distinct from cognitive intelligence, the two types of psychological processes are
interrelated. In fact past research has implicitly and explicitly proposed that emotional
intelligence and cognitive intelligence relate to job performance in independent and
complementary linear ways (Goleman, 1998). Emotional intelligence does not
become a stronger predictor of task performance as cognitive intelligence decreases
(Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2000).
This implies that feeding emotional skills alone into the curriculum without the
combination of cognitive skills would not increase the ability of military leaders.
What level of leadership in Military should we provide with EI?
Previous discussions have provided ample indications to show the importance of EI in
the social interactions in workplace. The literature also suggests that although it may
be nice to have leaders and employees with a high level of EI because these
10
employees tend to have a higher job satisfaction (Wong & Law, 2002), it is still
important to ensure the match of employee levels of EI to job requirement. It may be
a waste of resources and time to include EI in the curriculum when it is not required
for the job.
So when is the appropriate time to feed EI to the curriculum? What level of
leadership? In your language what rank would that be? Should we feed into Staff
Sergeant or Lieutenant Colonel level courses?
Those questions can only be answered by you, the curriculum development experts.
The traditional approach to curriculum and course design applies. Thorough
investigations such as job description analysis, occupational analysis and user
requirements need to be practiced.
Developing EI
The emotional intelligence literature is consistent in reporting that EI develop, sustain
overtime, increase with age and is linked with maturity(D. Goleman, 1998; Law et
al., 2004; Mayer et al., 2004). To some extent, EI may be learned through life
experience; however without sustained effort and attention our future military leaders
are unlikely to improve their emotional intelligence. The key to such improvement is
the development approach that is used.
Tactically focused programme such as short seminars and workshops that have
become the standard fare of most training and education efforts do little to advance
individual’s EI beyond increasing awareness and understanding (Jackson & Lash,
1999). Instead a much more purposeful developmental programme is needed – one
that can effectively transform the ingrained patterns of thoughts, feelings and
behaviour of EI.
In addition, EI can be extended through intensive individual coaching, relevant
feedback, and a strong desire for significant personal development. Providing reliable
and valid feedback on specific social and emotional skills and abilities provide
military leaders with insights into their strengths and areas for development. Offering
11
a more balanced view including a focus on strengths, an articulation of a personal
vision and how developing EI skills and abilities helps one achieve that vision – can
often overcome feelings and defensiveness that undermine social and emotional
abilities.
Conclusion
Emotional intelligence (EI) can be conceptualised as the ability to monitor one’s own
and other’s emotions to discriminate among them, and to use the information to guide
one’s thinking and actions (Salovey & Mayer, 1999). The case for which emotional
intelligence measure works best is still a discussion point and may be determined on a
case-by case basis (Chrusciel, 2006). Regardless of these arguments, it is clear that the
concept and domain of EI have been gradually accepted in numerous studies (Davies
et al., 1998; Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 1999; 2004; Law, Wong & Song, 2004;
Chrusciel, 2006). It is argued that if the concept and domain of EI is properly defined,
it is distinct from personality dimensions (Davies et al., 1998; Mayer, Caruso &
Salovey, 1999; Law, Wong & Song, 2004). My aim is not to dismiss the work and
concept on EI out of hand rather to propose to the military curriculum developers not
to take this concept for granted. To the contrary, I believe applying emotional
intelligence concept to military education and training development is an idea whose
time has come.
12
References
Abrahams, D. S. (2007). Emotional intelligence and army leadership: Give it to me
straight! Military Review, 87(86-93).
Bar-On, R. (1997). Bar-on emotional quotient inventory: Technical Manual. Toronto,
Canada: Multi Health System.
Bar-On, R. (2000). Emotional and social intelligence: Insights from the emotional
quotient inventory. . In R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The Handbook of
Emotional Intelligence: Theory, development, assessment, and application at
home, school, and in the workplace (pp. 363-388). San Francisco: JosseyBrass.
Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Transformational leadership and
emotional intelligence: An exploratory study. The Leadership and
Organizational Development Journal, 21(1), 157-161.
Cherniss, C., & Goleman, D. (2001). The emotionally intelligent workplace. San
Francisco, CA. : Jossey-Bass,.
Chrusciel, D. (2006). Considerations of emotional intelligence (EI) in dealing with
change decision management. Management Decision, 44(5), 644-657.
Ciarrochi, J. V., Chan, A. Y. C., & Caputi, P. (2000). A critical evaluation of the
emotional intelligence construct. Personality and Individual Differences,
28(3), 539-561.
Cote, S., & Miners, C. T. H. (2006). Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence
and job performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 1-28.
Davies, M., Stankov, L., & Roberts, R. (1998). Emotional intelligence: In search of an
elusive construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), 9891015.
Dulewicz, C., Young, M., & Dulewicz, V. (2005). The relevance of emotional
intelligence for leadership performance. Journal of General Management,
30(3), 71-86.
Gabel, R. S., Dolan, S. L., & Cerdin, J. L. (2005). Emotional intelligence as predictor
of cultural adjustment for success in global assignment. Career Development
International, 10(5), 375.
George, J. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional intelligence.
Human Relations, 53, 1027-1055.
13
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). The new leaders. New York: Little
Brown.
Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987). Positive effect facilitates
creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52,
1122-1131.
Jackson, M., & Lash, R. (1999, Nov, 29, 1999). Enhancing your leaders' emotional
intelligence. Canadian HR Reporter, Nov, 2.
Lam, L., & Kirby, S. (2002). Is emotional intelligence an advantage? An exploration
of the impact of emotional and general intelligence on individual performance.
. The Journal of Social Psychology, 142(1), 133-143.
Latour, M., Bradley, C., & Hosmer, U. (2002). Emotional intelligence: Implications
for all United States Air Force Leaders. Air & SPace Power Journal(Nov).
Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Song, L. J. (2004). The construct and criterion validity of
emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 89, 483-496.
Livingstone, H., Najjiwon-Foster, M., & Smithers, S. (2002). Emotional Intelligence
& Military Leadership.Unpublished manuscript, Toronto.
Matthews, G., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2002). Emotional intelligence: Science
and myth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey &
D. Sluyte (Eds.), MEmotional Development and Emotional Intelligence:
Educational Implications (pp. 3-31). New York: Basic Books.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso emotional
intelligence test (MSCEIT) user’s manual. Toronto, ON: MHS.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory,
findings, and implications. Psychology Inquiry, 15(3), 197-215.
Pearce, J. L., & Randel, A. E. (2004). Expectation or organisational mobility,
workplace social inclusion, and employee job performance. Journal of
Organizational Behaviour, 25, 81-98.
Pellitteri, J. (2002). The relationship between emotional intelligence and ego defence
mechanisms. The Journal of Psychology, 136(2), 182-194.
14
Roche, M. (2004). Towards EI at a medium sized plactic manufacturing company.
New Zealand Journal of Applied Business Research, 3(November), 41-50.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition,
and Personality, 9, 185-211.
Semadar, A., Robins, G., & Ferris, G. R. (2006). Comparing the validity of multiple
social effectiveness constructs in the prediction of managerial performance.
Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 27, 443-461.
Wong, C. S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional
intelligence of performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The
Leadership Quarterly, 13, 243-274.
Yulk, G. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5 ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
15